Pro se
plaintiff Scott A. Brown, a Wisconsin prisoner incarcerated
at the Columbia Correctional Institution (CCI), asserts
Eighth Amendment claims against various CCI employees. Brown
contends that defendants failed to respond adequately to his
threats of suicide and that they are not taking Brown's
mental illnesses seriously.

Brown
has made an initial partial payment of the filing fee under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The next step is for me to
screen his complaint and dismiss any portion that is legally
frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or asks for monetary damages from a
defendant who by law cannot be sued for money damages. 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915 and 1915A. I must read Brown's
pro se complaint generously. See Haines v. Kerner,
404 U.S. 519, 521 (1972) (per curiam). With these principles
in mind, I conclude that Brown fails to state a claim. I will
dismiss the case, and Brown will incur a strike under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Brown
also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. Dkt. 3. I
will deny the motion.

ALLEGATIONS
OF FACT

I draw
the following facts from Brown's complaint, Dkt. 1, which
I accept as true.

A.
Correspondence with Baures

On
September 26, 2016, Brown submitted a request form to see
defendant Dickson Baures, a psychologist at CCI, because
Brown had suicidal thoughts. The next day, Baures met with
Brown. Two days later, on September 29, Baures responded to
Brown's request form, stating that Baures met and
discussed the concerns on September 27 and that they
developed a plan for treating Brown's behavior.

On
October 3, Brown submitted multiple request forms to see
Baures. (It is unclear how many forms he submitted.) Brown
indicated in one form that he had “been very depressed
having thoughts and dreams, sweating in my sleep.”
Id. ¶¶ 16, 20. He wrote in another form
that “this is making me very depressed knowing I have
to go through this.” Id. ¶ 18. The next
day, Baures sent Brown a letter stating, “you are on my
list.” Id. ¶ 19. Two days later, on
October 6, Baures met with Brown again and discussed
Brown's concerns.

On
October 17, Brown submitted two request forms. He wrote in
one form that he had “been depressed lately and
it's been very hard on me to sleep because of the
dreams.” Id. ¶ 22. He wrote in the other
form that he wished to know the exact diagnosis of his mental
condition. Id. ¶ 23. The next day, Baures
responded by saying, “Please see Memo dated 10-18-16 .
. . We will discuss this in our next Appointment.”
Id. ¶ 24. Brown does not explain what Baures
wrote in the memorandum.

On
October 24, Brown submitted yet another request form, telling
Baures he had “been depressed trying to do other things
like read, write, listening to my radio, and working
out” and that he had suicidal thoughts and dreams.
Id. ¶ 25. Three days later, on October 27,
Baures responded by saying “I will see you as soon as I
can. Please inform staff if there is an emergency.”
Id. ¶ 26.

B.
October 27, 2016 incident

On
October 27, the same day he received a response from Baures,
Brown told an unnamed correctional officer that he needed to
speak to Baures because he had suicidal thoughts. The
correctional officer let Brown out of his cell and escorted
him to see Baures, who interviewed Brown and discussed his
concerns. Brown told Baures that he needed to be on
observation status because of the thoughts he had. Baures did
not place Brown on observation status and instead told a
correctional officer that Baures did not want Brown to cut
himself and wanted Brown to stay out of his cell and help
clean up the dayroom. Baures also told Brown to “try
and use [Brown's] coping skills.” Id.
¶ 29.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;On the
same day, Brown told defendant Sgt. Willett that he needed to
see Baures again and that Baures had instructed Brown to
inform a staff member in case of an emergency. Willett
responded by saying that Brown had already seen Baures that
day and that &ldquo;Baures told them that she [had] seen
[Brown] and she only see[s] [Brown] once a week and that
[Brown] knew that.&rdquo; Id. ¶ 31. Willett
also added that Baures was probably on her way home at the
time because the Psychological Services Unit (PSU) staff at
CCI usually leave the prison at 4:30 p.m. and that Baures
would be back the next day. Brown asked Willett what he was
...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.